Matthew Lee

521 posts

Matthew Lee banner
Matthew Lee

Matthew Lee

@Science_Matt

postdoc @IARCWHO, previously @mrcieu, epidemiology, running, he/him

Lyon, France Katılım Ocak 2010
262 Takip Edilen287 Takipçiler
Matthew Lee retweetledi
Emma Hazelwood
Emma Hazelwood@EpiHazelwood·
Really enjoying this double conference IGES and ASHG trip so far! Come to poster 8006 at 2.30 to hear about how where we carry fat tissue influences our risk of cancer! #ASHG2024
Emma Hazelwood tweet media
English
1
2
17
989
Matthew Lee retweetledi
Vanessa Tan
Vanessa Tan@vytancrane·
1/4 Excited to share our latest preprint where we used observational and Mendelian randomization methods to explore the role of metabolites as intermediates between adiposity and endometrial cancer using data from UK Biobank (@uk_biobank). medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
English
1
6
11
1K
Matthew Lee retweetledi
Andrew Akbashev
Andrew Akbashev@Andrew_Akbashev·
Overpublishing puts enormous stress on students and PIs. And brings tons of money to publishers in STEM. A new study shows that the number of papers is increasing FASTER than the number of #PhD graduates. It’s an amazing work with very useful statistics. Huge kudos to the authors! ▫️ Main outcomes: 1️⃣ In 2022 the number of articles is 47% higher than in 2016. The amount of writing, reviewing and editing workload per scientist is increased enormously. 2️⃣ “Special issues” is a strategy for publishing lots of papers with reduced review time. This is possible due to the “publish or perish” pressure and clearly benefits the publishers. 3️⃣ The publishing time varies widely! MDPI = 37 days. Frontiers = 72 days. Elsevier = 134 days. Springer = 157 days. Nature = 185 days. 4️⃣ The article rejection rates do not seem to correlate with publisher growth. However, rejection rates decline with increased use of special issue publishing. 5️⃣ Certain for-profit gold-open-access publishers create an increasing number of special issues, with uniquely reduced turnaround times, and in specific cases, high impact inflation and reduced rejection rates. 6️⃣ The authors suggest a new metric - Impact Inflation, which is reflected in self-citation within the same journal. For example, MDPI has a high impact inflation due to excessive self-citation compared to other publishers. Conclusions and my opinion: - Scientists have to spend a lot more time on reviewing and writing than before (on average). - The more papers are published, the more the quality is compromised. - Scientific progress has become partially bound to the business models of publishers and their revenue (a sad reality today). - There is a huge lack of transparency. Much of these data had to be ‘web-scraped’ from numerous sources in order to get a full picture. We clearly need regulators to mandate open access to publisher’s statistics. - Reduce the number of special issues! Those typically have low standards. ▫️ Science, publishing and funding make a trio that is very hard to disentangle. However, research quality is controlled by the community. This is why preprint + community review can make a big difference. #AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter
Andrew Akbashev tweet media
English
50
1.1K
3.2K
877.1K
Matthew Lee retweetledi
Richard Sever
Richard Sever@cshperspectives·
Big new article from me in @PLOSBiology on the past, present and future of science publishing. 6n 🧵 on what I try to do here. (RTs appreciated). 1/n doi.org/10.1371/journa…
English
13
290
597
231.7K
Matthew Lee retweetledi
Zoltán Kutalik
Zoltán Kutalik@zkutalik·
Do you consider doing a PhD in statistical human genetics in a wonderful location? My lab [wp.unil.ch/sgg/] has open position(s) to explore human interactions, region-specific effects, evolutionary optimal transcript levels by developing advanced causal inference methods
Zoltán Kutalik tweet media
English
1
39
73
16.3K
Matthew Lee retweetledi
Gus Hamilton
Gus Hamilton@gushamilton·
We have a new short preprint up examining two commonly used non-linear Mendelian randomisation approaches using negative controls in the wake of recent concerns about their performance medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
English
1
12
36
17.9K
Matthew Lee retweetledi
Stephen Burgess
Stephen Burgess@stevesphd·
New pre-print available: "Violation of the constant genetic effect assumption can result in biased estimates for non-linear Mendelian randomization" available at medrxiv.org/content/10.110…. An update that no scientist ever wants to give. Thread follows:
English
2
31
115
0
Matthew Lee retweetledi
George Monbiot
George Monbiot@GeorgeMonbiot·
How many of you know what Cruella Braverman's Public Order Bill contains? It's frankly unbelievable: legislation you might expect in Russia, Iran or Egypt. Here's a summary from my column today:
George Monbiot tweet media
English
618
9.4K
15.9K
0